So I've got a student who I know would absolutely LOVE playing the Bach inventions. He's got some talent, loves classical and jazz, and is always enthusiastic about the piano. I've also started to teach him some basic things on guitar.

I want to give him something that will be a little stretching, but that he'll love to work on. He's currently in the Faber lesson book 3B and has probably played 50% or so of the pieces in the book. He's got some funny things in his technique from his old teacher that I'm trying to weed out [arms/wrists move all over the place, elbows go flying, he likes bouncing away from the keys a bit to much, and some other things] but he CAN play.

I was thinking of giving the kid an invention to work on [although I haven't decided which one] or doing a Clementi Sonatina. Both have their merits as far as developing his technique and musicality though, but man am I partial to playing Bach for developing a pianist. Also, an invention is the perfect way to teach a young piano player the importance of practicing hands separately, something I came to learn far to late in life. What do you all, the more experienced teachers than me, think? [Obviously I realize you don't know the student and that makes giving a true judgment call impossible, but some general advice would be good.]

Teach him some AMBN pieces first. Then some Little Preludes. Maybe some dance movements. Leave the inventions for after that. He'd probably practice the AMBN pieces more because they are songs everyone would recognize.

3B of Faber is quite low...let me put some perspective: Level 5 has the first Clementi sonatina and a Burgmuller etude. These are around level 3 of most repertoire series/etc. Inventions are from 7-9.

Faber 3B is a good point of departure from method books into repertoire, but the kid should not be touching the Inventions unless he is super-duper talented.

I guess that just confirms what I was already thinking. I definitely think he would do much better in repertoire, simply because he loves the music so much, but I love the inventions so much that I wanted to teach him one but had hesitations about it. I didn't learn "classically" so some things, like when to jump into the rep and where, I'm unsure of. I was in a level 3 Michael Aaron book, got bored working one one piece, and went and learned Clair De Lune, Chopin 34/2, and Bach invention #4 without my teacher knowing. So I'm not the best judge as for when someone is ready for something...cause what worked for me was diving in way over my head and figuring it out.

What rep should I jump to? I know he's played Bach's Minuet in G already. Maybe some more Anna Magdalena? Or do the C major Clementi? [Opus 36 I think?]

The Anna Magdalena Bach Notebook is a problematic set of pieces because the range is so wide, and not all the pieces in it are good.

Clementi Op. 36 has a similar problem in terms of difficulty swing.

Why don't you try one of those ready-made anthologies like Jane Magrath's Masterwork Classics (book 2) or Celebration Series: Perspectives (book 1) or Discovering Piano Literature (volume 1)? Those are safer bets with this student transitioning out of method books.

Remember that if you are going to give him a hard piece to motivate him, it should be a piece HE loves, not necessarily a piece you love.

Being a music major, I'm sure you can admit that you didn't really 'learn' those songs at that point. So it's not really always best to do so. You should try to see if your school offers Piano Pedagogy classes. If not, try researching materials that will help you become a better teacher. Knowing an instrument does NOT mean one is qualified to teach - that is a science and art in and of itself (not that I'm saying you aren't qualified, but we can always continue to learn).

I stopped my students after level 2B of Faber and went into repertoire. I used the "Masterwork Classics" series for everybody because they were cheap, well edited, came with a CD, and covered a good deal of classical repertoire. I also supplemented with a jazz book and whatever else I thought might match. One student I had was working on only supplemental books (modern repertoire and composers). Another was just doing the classical and jazz. It depends on the student, I think.

At 3B, I think he could move into level 2 or 3 of Keith Snell, level 2 of Masterwork Classics, level A of First Impressions, level 2 or 3 of Celebration...it all really depends on him. I'd say start at the easier end, though, because of the challenges that come with moving into repertoire.

I think students should work on the four main groups: Baroque, Classical, Romantic, Contemporary, Contemporary (where Contemporary can mean anything after Romantic - modern, 20th century, jazz, pop, rock, etc!). Kabalevsky Op 39 would be a great place to start. Maybe some Burgmuller. Clementi and Kuhlau are always nice. Gurlitt has some lovely sonatinas too, but I think they would be too difficult. Beethoven and Mozart had MANY pieces to teach from - the dances and such.

I think you should familiarize yourself with the teaching repertoire before moving onto repertoire though. And definitely ask your own teacher for guidance on learning how to teach.

Something else to consider, perhaps, is to keep him in Piano Adventures and add these books as supplements:

http://pianoadventures.com/publications/mainLibraries/devArtist.html

(Though I personally don't care for them... way too much jumping around and barely any pieces... plus, it's two extra books: Literature and Sonatina, which not only gets pricey but can last for *too long* at one level along with all the other books in the PA series!).

TrueMusic,

I would use a graded repertoire series and AMBN. I found it helpful to use the Royal Conservatory of Music Piano Syllabus to help figure out levels especially with AMBN pieces with their wide range.

I second the recommendation for going into a repertoire book such at the Celebration Series. As to which level, I say he could do either Level 1 or 2. 2 would present a challenge like you wanted, but since you mention he has some issues from previous teacher you're still working out, you may want to keep it simpler - he can always advance quickly through them if they are easy and you can focus on technical issues).

If you do this series I highly recommend getting the Teacher Handbook. This will not only help you decide which pieces to work with him on, but also give you pointers as to what challenges the student may experience and how to address them.

As a self/learner of around level 2-5 (depending on energy and concentration and task - reading vs fingers) I've received advice to try some easier Bach Inventions (1,8). Definitely beyond my possibilities of multitasking coordination now. But if I had that much patience, I think I'd be able to decipher and learn 1 melodic line at a time. How to put them together gracefully - would need another brain ;-) and building that over time and a lot of work would be the essence of "level ups"...

In the wonderful book _Instrumental music for dyslexics", Sheila Oglethorpe suggests for learning early counterpoint for "intelligent dyslexics" at Grade 3:
"Five Little Preludes and Fugues" by Alec Rowley.
The little excerpts shown sound interesting and they do exercise 2-hand coordination. She even suggests a different way of notating the same note flow (on 1 staff instead of 2 staffs, one on ledger lines; better time alignment of attack moments), to better show the voices and hand shifts needed.

Anyone having experience with Mr. Rowley's didactic pieces?

I certainly didn't play them as well as I might have now, but I like to think I did alright. That moment was a massive jump in my playing for me - I never backed off since then. So for me it was a pivotal experience. I can still tell the analysis of these pieces, break down section by section, I could play back probably 95% of them even after not playing them for five years now, and it was a lesson for me in playing what's on the sheet. But, I guess not everyone can be expected to be thrown over board and swim back. I wouldn't want to discourage the kid!

I do pretty well with teaching when it comes to building technique, keeping kids motivated, teaching the basics, and teaching the kids musicality even in simple pieces, but I just don't know the teaching rep and beginner rep well and the "natural progression" of playing because I just did not follow any sort of natural progression. Most people now would have discouraged me from doing what I did - but it changed the way I play for the better. I'll swing by a local music store and see what I can find on repertoire series, thanks for some direction on that.



Good advice from someone who is more in this same situation as my student! Thanks! I'll look into the Rowley. I might even try writing a couple simple pieces for him, just sort of as an exercise for me and I could write specifically what his technique needs rather than pray I find a piece that does it. It'd be good for me since I have a tendency to write music a bit on the "to difficult side" and almost everything I've written requires a professional player.

Have you ever considered taking a pedagogy class? I think you might find it quite helpful.

They just don't fit into my schedule. :[. I don't need them for my degree and I can't find time to fit one into my crazy life as an elective. I'll try to schedule a sit-down meeting with the professor of the class and get some more solid advice on beginning rep. Like I said, I know enough about the mechanics of playing, the things one needs to learn to make progress at the instrument, and many genres of music to progress and grow my students well, just sometimes I don't know things like how difficult a Bach invention really would be for a "level three" pianist, since I just basically skipped from level three to Bach inventions and never looked back, because my fingers could do it I just had trouble reading [my biggest struggle in learning piano has been to decipher what's on the sheet, not get my fingers to do it once I've figured it out.]

Pick up a copy of:

1) the MTAC syllabus (purchase online below)
http://www.mtac.org/shopping/index.php

2)Keith Snell syllabus (available for free online here)
http://kjos.vo.llnwd.net/o28/pdf/brochures/snell_reper_index.pdf

3) RCM syllabus (available for free online here)
http://www.theachievementprogram.org/sites/default/files/files/TAP_syllabus_piano_2012.pdf

4) Guide to teaching repertoire (purchase below - definitely recommend this one!)
http://www.amazon.com/Pianists-Standard-...iano+repertoire

5) and a handful of piano pedagogy books (you could probably borrow these from your local library/university library - just to browse and get some different perspectives and such).

Examine the different levels, see what fits in each, what the general trends are, any comments, etc.

Again, I don't think you'll find any value in jumping from 2B to the Inventions or ONLY difficult pieces. You may think that was where your playing improved when you did it, but I'm going to bet the same could have been done with pieces that were just above your level and much better with that. The point is to develop skills, and that should be done gradually and progressively.

to clarify, Faber 3B ends with their non-trivial arrangement (but in C) of Pachelbel's Canon.

Hi TrueMusc. I am not a piano teacher but I will nonetheless permit myself to comment.

I think that there is no problem for your kid to do an Invention. I suppose that you're thinking of the C-major. In general I don't consider it a difficult piece to learn, even for students with little experience, to the contrary I think that it is an excellent terrain on which to deal with a great number of things ... including reading.

The important question, is not whether the student is ready but whether you are ready to teach this material. It is not enough to love a piece, it is not enough to be able to play it, even very well. The important question is above all to know what you want to transmit to your student, and also to have an idea of how to do that.

In my opinion, hands separate practice is not a sufficient reason. If that is your principle pedagogic goal you should (a) choose some other material for your student. And (b) undertake yourself a study of the Inventions, to deepen your undertanding of them, to transform your enthusiasm and love into something that you master and that you can then pass on to others.

So I guess if he wants, he can also assign something from the WTC?

I don't see how an important thing to consider isn't the level and ability of the student. That point just baffles me.

I appreciate the response. I've definitely decided not to teach the invention to him right now. Although your point of me being ready to teach them is a very valid one indeed. I'm considering going through my copy of the inventions and learning each one up to a decent performance level and study them more in depth. I've studied a number of them, but to go through each one would be beneficial to both my teaching and my playing. I do think that even before that point I am perfectly ready to teach that music, but that could just be my arrogance [ignorance?] rather than truly being prepared coming through.

No, the important question IS whether or not the student is ready to learn the material. You might not think Invention No. 1 is difficult, but it is clearly not appropriate for a kid still in method books. It's like asking a 3rd-grade student to read Romeo and Juliet.

Look, we all have to start teaching somewhere. I'm not particularly proud of some of the repertoire selection I made for my first group of students. Teachers learn, too.

If a kid is in method books is isn't his fault. It is just the approach his teacher takes, and there are other approaches.



I don't think so, it's not like that at all.

Sorry to disagree, but student readiness is crucial. Voicing the Inventions is the primary goal of the performer. If you cannot do it, you'll have a difficult time transmitting this to the student, of course, a given. But students must be physically at the level where they can completely control each hand and finger independently. Your RH is strong while the LH is soft, then it shifts. Then you must be able to shape each subject appropriately. Without good physical control, you'll miss the primary purpose of these little etudes. And FWIW, most authorities place them at the upper level of intermediate literature. For the reasons I've stated.

How do you figure?

Regardless of whether a teacher uses a pre-programmed method (in this case, Piano Adventures) or has developed their own (which is still considered a method isn't important. They aren't really different approaches either.

So what you said so far makes zero sense and you haven't bothered to support your claim or ideas. I seriously have no idea how you think a student can jump from playing simple one-melody-line + some chords in a 5-line song to an invention. TrueMusic can think he did alright after jumping, but as I said before, I bet he wouldn't have reading problems or many of the other things I've seen him mention in other threads if he progressed more gradually.

This doesn't mean it would take a certain number of months/years. Some people will progress quickly. But in my experience and in the experience of those around me, jumping so drastically (completely) isn't often beneficial to anyone. And you can't use the excuse "Well, he played it well for someone who's only been playing for three months/whatever" because that is no indication of quality and it is the teacher's job to ensure QUALITY teaching.

It is neither the method book, nor a general "one answer". It is the teacher who is teaching the student, observing that student, knowing what skills are needed, which have been taught, and where he is going with that student at that time, and for what reason. I bet there is more than one answer and that these answers depend on exactly these things.

True. But there are sane teachers and insane teachers.

Whenever I mention teachers in that way, I'm assuming that everyone will filter incompetence out of the equation.